Risk of anaphylaxis from aprotinin re-exposure during LVAD removal and heart transplantation

A randomized clinical trial to compare the efficacy of submucosal aprotinin injection and intravenous dexamethasone in reducing pain and swelling after third molar surgery: a prospective study

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare two different groups of drugs, aprotinin and dexamethasone for its efficacy in reducing post operative swelling and pain after third molar surgery.

METHODS

Fifty consecutive patients requiring surgical removal of single mandibular third molar (class II position B) under local anesthesia were randomly divided into two groups, each group consisting of 25 patients. One group was administered 8 mg dexamethasone through intravenous route pre-operatively. The other group received 1 ml of Aprotinin through submucosal route in operating area after the onset of local anesthesia. Swelling was assessed by measuring facial contours at baseline and at 1st, 3rd and 7th post-operative days. Pain was measured on the 1st, 3rd and 7th post-operative days using visual analog scale. Based on statistical analysis (paired t test and Wilcoxon's signed ranking test), the results showed statistically significant difference in post operative swelling and pain on 3rd postoperative day in dexamethasone group as compared to aprotinin group.

RESULTS

The results of present study showed a similar reduction in the severity of pain and swelling at the aprotinin and dexamethasone sites on 1st and 7th postoperative day. It was also noticed that the aprotinin promoted a greater reduction of swelling and pain on 3rd postoperative day.

CONCLUSION

It appeared that, benefits of aprotinin against the risks of dexamethasone and its efficacy in controlling pain and swelling after third molar surgery makes aprotinin to be a valuable alternative to dexamethasone.

Adverse effects of fibrin sealants in thoracic surgery: the safety of a new fibrin sealant: multicentre, randomized, controlled, clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

The safety of fibrin sealants (FS) has been questioned in the light of recent reports of adverse effects. We evaluated the safety of a new FS in a randomized controlled trial (RCT).

METHODS

Multicentre, open-label Phase II/III RCT to evaluate the safety of the new FS. The trial was approved by the Ethic Committee of each three participating Centre. FS includes two components (component 1: fibrinogen; component 2: thrombin), each of them subjected to two viral inactivation procedures. Out of 200 screened patients, 185 eligible patients (49 females, 136 males), aged between 18 and 75 years, undergoing major thoracic surgery were randomized to receive FS (#91 patients) as an adjuvant for air leak control or no treatment (#94 patients, control group). Safety variables were: percentage of subjects with adverse events associated with the therapy; formation of antibodies against bovine aprotinin; vital signs (blood pressure, body temperature, heart and respiratory rate); laboratory parameters.

RESULTS

Overall operative mortality was 3.2% (6/185), 1.1% in the FS group and 5.3% in the control group, respectively. Twenty patients (22%) had adverse events in the FS group and 22 (23.4%) in the control group. Atrial fibrillation (five patients in the FS group and four in the control group) and hyperpyrexia (five and seven patients, respectively, in the two groups) were the most common adverse events. No patient reported thromboembolic events (pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis) during the in hospital stay or within 1 month from discharge. None of the adverse events was considered as treatment related. The formation of bovine aprotinin antibodies was reported in a total of 34 patients (37.4%) in the FS group and was not related to any adverse effect.

CONCLUSIONS

The present RCT did not show any increased risk of adverse events, and of surgical complications, related to the use of the new FS.

Forty Years of Clinical Aprotinin Use: A Review of 124 Hypersensitivity Reactions

Since its clinical introduction, the anaphylactic potential of aprotinin has been a major concern. World wide, its use is expanding so there is an increased chance that patients have reexposure from various sources. The risk of anaphylaxis is approximately 2.8% in reexposed patients. From 1963 to 2003, 124 cases of aprotinin-induced anaphylaxis were reported in 61 publications. Eleven patients died. The reexposure interval was less than 3 months in 72% (38 of 53 patients). This review looks at the profile of patients at risk so preventive measures may be taken. Past and future exposures have to be taken into account before any aprotinin administration.

Surgical advances in heart and lung transplantation

The successes of thoracic transplantation have led to the expansion of indications and a subsequent growth in demand for a short supply of organs. In response to this disparity, the criteria for organ donation have been liberalized. Despite these difficult challenges, with advances in surgical techniques and perioperative care of both the donor and recipient, outcomes have continued to improve over time. This article focuses on the more recent surgical advances in donor selection and management, procurement and implantation, and the impact of these advances on patient outcome.